Any updates? - Sidings East Dulwich on the top of Railway rise

[GD JP]

Hi all

Any updates on this planning? I checked the last form but there is no date for commencing so if anyone knows anything it would be appreciated

On Friday I saw massive blockers being placed at the gate

[James Barber]

Current status of Planning Application 24/AP/2314 is the approval document was published 31 December 2025 with effect 1 January 2026.  https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/E5F5EC6005598720843BC00D7E6A7D11/pdf/24_AP_2314-DECISION_NOTICE_-_MAJOR_-_GRANT-4194604.pdf

It has 41 conditions many of which must be confirmed via further applications into Southwark Council before works on site can begin. I've not seen any applications to start discharging those conditions yet - amazed some of these have not been prepared by the developer. No work of any kind is allowed on site until some of those conditions are discharged.

Additionally the sites proximity to the rail tracks means Network Rail will have to be heavily involved. My work experiences with Network Rail would suggest quite some delay will come rom them alone. 

With the national government and Southwark Council planning to reduce the proportion of social housing from 35% to 20%, and some schemes in Southwark are now only provided 2% social housing. It would be amazing if the developer doesn't seek an amended viability appraisal to reduce social housing for the scheme or even taller buildings.

[beansprout]

How can councils reduce social housing element? Is this just London or through out UK? Housebuilders making enough money as it is!! 

When are housebuilders going to understand their social responsibilities — with a shortage of property throughout UK, guess like everything, does not matter whuch Govt in charge… back handers, mates blah blah..

Been going on for years… 

Europe as a whole, well most of them can find ways of supporting homeless with pods etc, turn containers into housing and we in UK? Do what?

Govt - all for some extraordinary reason are not accountable for mis using tax payers money..

NHS not held accountable either for mis use of funds and yet, we expect and complain if  overworked doctors, nurses etc are doing their best in a very difficult situation.

Years ago, wrote a paper on elderly care, bed blocking, dementia and no plans going forward to accommodate or in deed plans in place to sort out social care..

No wonder, medical professions are looking to work or relocate abroad.. 

Simply do not get it at all.. changing names of govt departments to something what? Acceptable in 21century is not going to solve the problems…

Same goes for police, fire department, ambulances, schools etc.. only sector that seems to be having and have had for years, monies and support is sport… 

Education is in same situation - having to ask for donations for books, musical instruments etc and now expected to train toddlers in how to use utensils for food, provide food and train/assist  potty training to use of toilets…plus normal teacher and or assistant duties.

Not even going to go down route of SEN needs…

Rant over.. 

 

 

 

 

 

[mitchiner]

What do they mean by “affordable” housing? Unsure how they will profit with 41 of these if they are council flats

[beansprout]

My  understanding is that all developments whatever size, have to have an element of social housing…affordable housing… council housing..No longer sure of percentage but clearly less than years ago..

The point is house builders clearly make a profit or they simply would not  continue building what I refer to as modern  boxes!  Putting housing condensed or what originally was one house with land attached. 

Huge development going on in Beckenham - 200 social housing and rest open market.. sited over several houses now demolished… up the road from the park on way into town centre.. might even be completed by now.. haven’t been that way in last year… certainly can’t miss it..

So, for example, let’s say a developer builds houses and flats on a site… social housing I assume would be in a separate block to other flats and I assume house as well. Ie to put it bluntly, away from main site.. Nothing wrong in that at all. 

Many years ago, near Borough a developer built flats divided into blocks. . Price range £300/400,000. Social housing was in a different block…. Can’t remember how many… so families , couples etc got a brand new flat with modern kitchen and bathrooms, flooring etc  and could not even keep common parts clean.. trash thrown out and left including out of windows etc..total disregard for community and certainly not  grateful for brand new property and a home.. I hasten to add, not every flat in the social housing sector but certainly a fair few behaved that way.

 

 

 

[march46]

On 25/01/2026 at 11:07, James Barber said:

With the national government and Southwark Council planning to reduce the proportion of social housing from 35% to 20%, and some schemes in Southwark are now only provided 2% social housing. It would be amazing if the developer doesn't seek an amended viability appraisal to reduce social housing for the scheme or even taller buildings.

Southwark Council has issued a response  on changes to planning in London, urging a rethink - 
 
“We have significant concerns over plans to allow developers to build fewer affordable homes in London, and to cut developer contributions to local communities.
 
“Under current proposals, the fast-track threshold for planning applications in London would be cut from 35% affordable housing to 20%.
 
“The proposals would also cut in half the levy that developers currently pay when they build, which helps pay for much-need local community improvements.
 
“Today we have submitted our responses to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and Greater London Authority consultations and urged a rethink.”
 
Read the council’s response in full https://southwark.gov.uk/planning-environment-and-building-control/planning/planning-policy-and-guidance/responses

[James Barber]

Good update - thanks march46. The actual % Southwark Council is currently agreeing with developers that must be social housing is generally much lower - not walking the talk.

And the council currently has over 1,250 empty council properties and rising, plus over 5,000 empty private properties. 

[Jenijenjen]

There are many reasons that properties both private and council are empty and these numbers do not signify that they could be moved into tomorrow to reduce homeless numbers. For example, in my terrace of 10 houses, one house is going through probate and another is going through a large scale renovation. 20% non ocupancy seems high until you examine the reasons why. Both will be providing homes in due course, sooner rather than later.